This would be from the maintainers not eCosCentric BTW :-). So anything
eCosCentric-y wouldn't be covered in that correction. It's up to
eCosCentric to do that if they want, although they (err... we (oh this is
confusing)) could follow up to such an article themselves of course if they
wish.

Any idea how you will introduce this text to make it clear its from
the maintainers not eCosCentric? As you say, its confusing, and you
known the difference!

For a start I can send it from my personal e-mail addr. And the point is
that I'm not going to put it out until you other guys are okay with it, at
which point that allows me to say something like:

Recently an article was published in SD Times about eCos and the proposed
copyright assignment of Red Hat owned portions to the FSF. Unfortunately a
number of factual errors were made in the article, and the eCos maintainers
would like to be able to inform and reassure eCos users about the content
of that article, an uncorrected version of which may be found at
http://sdtimes.com/news/096/emb1.htm

[etc.]

so since it says it's from the maintainers and there's no mention of
eCosCentric, I hope that would do...... but of course, duh, I've just
realised you could post it too :-). I'm not really bothered which of us
does it. Yeah, do that once we're sure no-one has any issues with it (we've
waited a while already, so waiting a couple more days in case people are
out of town is fine).

The text itself is great.

Just trying to keep it to the facts anyway. Feel free to nitpick if I've
introduced any slant!